Prosocial Spending and Buying Time: Money as a Tool for Increasing Subjective Well-Being

Elizabeth  Dunn; A.V.  Whillans; Michael I. Norton; Lara B. Aknin

Article | Advances in Experimental Social Psychology

Prosocial Spending and Buying Time: Money as a Tool for Increasing Subjective Well-Being

by Elizabeth Dunn, A.V. Whillans, Michael I. Norton and Lara B. Aknin

Abstract

Researchers have long been interested in the relationship between income and happiness, but a newer wave of work suggests that how people use their money also matters. We discuss the three primary areas in which psychologists have explored the relationship between spending decisions and subjective well-being, beginning with a brief review of seminal research on the benefits of buying experiences. We then offer an in-depth review of two other domains in which changes in spending decisions have been shown to increase well-being: using money to benefit others (“prosocial spending”) and giving up money to have more time (“buying time”). We discuss how, when, and why prosocial spending and buying time promote happiness. In doing so, we critically consider the evidentiary value of past findings (particularly our own) and provide links to all of our available data as well as practical recommendations about how to replicate our findings (e.g., which measures and manipulations produce the most consistent results). Taken together, our studies on prosocial spending and buying time underscore the value of conceptualizing money not only as a stable life circumstance but also as a tool that individuals can intentionally utilize to alter their own happiness levels.

Keywords: wellbeing; Money; Spending; Decision Making; Happiness;

Format: Print

Read Now

Citation:

Dunn, Elizabeth, A.V. Whillans, Michael I. Norton, and Lara B. Aknin. "Prosocial Spending and Buying Time: Money as a Tool for Increasing Subjective Well-Being." Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (in press).

When looking to improve workplace performance, people often seek third-party input by asking for feedback. However, we propose that asking for feedback might not be the most effective way of soliciting critical and actionable input. We offer a simple yet powerful alternative: ask for advice instead. Across four experiments (N=1,438), including a field experiment, we show that people offer more critical and actionable input when they are asked to provide advice (versus feedback)—even when they are asked to provide comments on identical output. When asked to provide feedback (versus advice), givers focus too much on evaluating the recipient, which undermines their ability to generate constructive (i.e. critical and actionable) input. Our findings suggest that framing feedback provision as advice provision may be a promising way of soliciting constructive third-party input.

Each year across North America, millions of graduates have to make tradeoffs between time and money as they plan their next steps. Despite the importance of these choices, we know surprisingly little about how people navigate major life decisions that involve making more money at the expense of having less time, and vice versa. Researchers asked more than 1,000 graduating college students in Canada whether they generally prioritized time or money. They found that students who prioritized time at graduation were happier and more satisfied with their careers 1 to 2 years later than those who prioritized money. They explored why that might be and how factors like financial security and student debt play a role in people’s decision-making and happiness.

Working Paper | HBS Working Paper Series | 2019

Connecting the Dots: Superordinate Framing Enhances the Value of Unimportant Tasks

Jaewon Yoon, A.V. Whillans and Ed O'Brien

Each day, people begrudgingly complete mundane tasks. Four experiments (N = 3,502; two pre-registered) reveal that a simple intervention—superordinate framing—can enhance people’s task experiences. In two initial experiments, working adults were asked to describe unimportant, meaningless work tasks. Some participants reflected on how these tasks acted like puzzle pieces, connecting with other tasks to achieve a broader purpose (superordinate condition). Others reflected on the broad purpose of the unimportant task (purpose condition) or were assigned to a no-framing control condition. Participants in the superordinate condition reported greater joy, meaning, and motivation from the task compared to participants assigned to the purpose or control conditions (Experiments 1-2). This effect was moderated by task type, such that superordinate (vs. purpose) framing increased the enjoyment of unimportant but not important tasks (Experiment 2). Two additional experiments replicated these findings using real-time work tasks, and generalized to two kinds of superordinate frames: superordinate framing enhanced participants’ task experience regardless of whether they reflected on how their own tasks fit together over time (i.e., how their work now will combine with their own future work) or how their own tasks fit with others’ tasks (i.e., how their work will combine with others’ work; Experiments 3-4). Participants who viewed their task through a superordinate lens also demanded a higher wage for participation—providing further evidence that they valued these tasks more (Experiment 4). These findings highlight a costless psychological intervention that can boost people’s enjoyment of otherwise mundane and demotivating tasks.

Keywords: superordinate framing; Employees; Motivation and Incentives; Goals and Objectives; Mission and Purpose; Perspective;

Citation:

Yoon, Jaewon, A.V. Whillans, and Ed O'Brien. "Connecting the Dots: Superordinate Framing Enhances the Value of Unimportant Tasks." Harvard Business School Working Paper, No. 20-011, July 2019. View Details

Cite View Details Read Now

Faculty & Research

Prosocial Spending and Buying Time: Money as a Tool for Increasing Subjective Well-Being

Abstract

Citation:

About the Authors

More from these Authors